Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) vs GPT-6.1 Terra (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or GPT-6.1 Terra (Xhigh) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-11-10.
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallbac… scores 16.5 points higher (61.8 vs 45.3) but costs 18× as much to run the benchmark ($7106 vs $400; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallbac… when you need intelligence above 45.3, and GPT-6.1 Terra (Xhigh) when 45.3 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) | GPT-6.1 Terra (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 61.8 | 45.3 | −26.7% GPT-6.1 Terra (Xhigh) is 26.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $7,105.77 | $400.18 | −94.4% GPT-6.1 Terra (Xhigh) is 94.4% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 36.05s | 84.45s | +134.3% GPT-6.1 Terra (Xhigh) is 134.3% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $1.00 / $5.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-6.1 Terra (Xhigh) vs Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback): 26.7% less intelligence, 94.4% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 134.3% slower end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- GPT-6.1 Terra (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 46.30 for $389.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-high/gpt-6-1-terra-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-high/gpt-6-1-terra-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill